|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 8 post(s) |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12423
|
Posted - 2015.04.01 22:37:12 -
[1] - Quote
Hey everyone. As we mentioned on the o7 show today, we're making some balance changes to the Confessor and Svipul in our April release. We are extremely happy that so many people are having fun with these new ships and we are committed to keeping them powerful and exciting, but we ideally want that power and excitement to mainly come from the new mode switching mechanic, and less from the base stats of the ship outclassing its competition. At the moment these ships are a little bit too strong and provide a bit too much vale for their cost. We've been listening to a lot of feedback on these ships from many players (including at Fanfest) and we're ready to make a few tweaks.
The biggest area of change in this release will be in fitting. Both the Confessor and Svipul will be losing some powergrid to ensure that fitting choices for them are interesting and to pull back the power of some very high-PG fits.
We're also increasing the build requirements of both of these ships to bring them closer to our original target price and to help ensure that the value you get for the cost of the ship is reasonable.
The rest of the changes are more minor, but they involve small reductions in speed, agility and mass, as well as capacitor and shield recharge rates.
Confessor:
- Powergrid: 71 (-9)
- Max Velocity: 250 (-30)
- Mass: 2,200,000kg (-200,000)
- Shield Recharge Time: 800s (+175s)
- Inertia: 2.4 (+0.25)
- Capacitor Recharge Time: 320s (+20s)
Svipul:
- Powergrid: 68 (-10)
- Max Velocity: 270 (-20)
- Shield Recharge Time: 800s (+175s)
- Capacitor Recharge Time: 240s (+15s)
Material Requirements: +1 to each of Electromechanical Interface Nexus, Fullerene Intercalated Sheets, Optimized Nano-engines, Reconfigured Subspace Calibrator, Self-Assembling Nanolattice, Warfare Computation Core
These changes are intentionally limited in scope as we want to take advantage of our rapid release cadence to make small changes and observe effects. We are very interested in hearing your feedback!
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12439
|
Posted - 2015.04.01 23:00:28 -
[2] - Quote
Unsuccessful At Everything wrote:Much needed tweaks. Cant wait until tomorrow so I can believe them. CCP Fozzie wrote:We're also increasing the build requirements of both of these ships to bring them closer to our original target price and to help ensure that the value you get for the cost of the ship is reasonable.
Still trying to balance with price huh... thought you learned that lesson..
That term "balance with price" is very often misused by players. It's largely our fault though since we've repeatedly oversimplified when talking about past mistakes.
Cost is definitely a viable part of ship balance. It's only one small part, and it can never be used to justify an overpowered ship, but having different ships at different price points with somewhat different capabilities is a part of a healthy ship meta. Power in EVE should never increase linearly with cost, but it's absurd to suggest for instance that we need to make Vindicator and Megathrons exactly equal in power to avoid "balancing with price".
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12588
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 21:32:42 -
[3] - Quote
Hey everyone! Big thanks to everyone who has posted feedback about the first round of changes. We agree with the point that some of you were bringing up, that these first round of changes are a bit too harsh on long range weapon fits compared to short range weapon fits. A certain amount of added fitting pain for long range fits will be necessary, but long range weapon viability is a key part of the character of the tactical destroyers and it would be a shame to limit that more than absolutely necessary.
So we've come up with a second iteration of these changes, using a slightly more invasive set of adjustments. To reduce the impact of extremely high fittings while continuing to keep long range weapons competitive with short range weapons we are proposing a change to the turrets of the Confessor and Svipul. Both would lose 2 turrets (going to 4) but gain a new +50% damage role bonus to keep DPS the same. This allows us to reduce fittings significantly without harming long range fits as much, as the weapons will make a smaller percentage of the overall Powergrid and CPU consumption of the ships.
These new versions also include a mass reduction for the Svipul (which is how we directly impact the power of oversized prop modules) and a bit more speed reduction. Material requirement changes remain the same as in version one.
Confessor:
- New Role Bonus: +50% Small Energy Turret Damage
- Highslots: 6 (-1)
- Turrets: 4 (-2)
- Powergrid: 62 (-18)
- CPU: 180 (-10)
- Max Velocity: 235 (-45)
- Mass: 2,000,000kg (-400,000)
- Inertia: 2.7 (+0.55)
- Shield Recharge Time: 800s (+175s)
- Capacitor Recharge Time: 320s (+20s)
Svipul:
- New Role Bonus: +50% Small Projectile Turret Damage
- Highslots: 6 (-1)
- Turrets: 4 (-2)
- Powergrid: 59 (-19)
- CPU: 205 (-10)
- Max Velocity: 230 (-60)
- Mass: 1,500,000 (-400,000)
- Inertia: 3.5 (+0.85)
- Shield Recharge Time: 800s (+175s)
- Capacitor Recharge Time: 240s (+15s)
Material Requirements: +1 to each of Electromechanical Interface Nexus, Fullerene Intercalated Sheets, Optimized Nano-engines, Reconfigured Subspace Calibrator, Self-Assembling Nanolattice, Warfare Computation Core
Like I said above, thanks to everyone who has participated in this feedback thread so far. We're very interested in hearing your thoughts about this second iteration of the changes.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12592
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 21:50:22 -
[4] - Quote
Alexis Nightwish wrote: Fozzie, it seems odd that the Amarran ship is faster than the Minmatar one. Is that intentional?
There's a higher base speed on the Confessor, but the lower mass on the Svipul ensures that it's faster with prop mods on. High base speed but high mass to temper that speed is a feature of a lot of the Amarrian ships that we've rebalanced recently.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12592
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 22:01:53 -
[5] - Quote
Bagehi wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Alexis Nightwish wrote: Fozzie, it seems odd that the Amarran ship is faster than the Minmatar one. Is that intentional?
There's a higher base speed on the Confessor, but the lower mass on the Svipul ensures that it's faster with prop mods on. High base speed but high mass to temper that speed is a feature of a lot of the Amarrian ships that we've rebalanced recently. But faster than a Minmatar ship? If memory serves me, Minmatar ships usually have a higher base speed as well as lower mass. Base speed for Amarr ships is usually a couple percent slower than Minmatar base speed for comparable ships.
It'll differ from ship to ship, mainly depending on how big the mass difference is (pretty big in this case).
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12603
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 00:53:44 -
[6] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:which is how we directly impact the power of oversized prop modules ok but how about you just get rid of them entirely instead, they've always been full cancer
Saying it over and over again doesn't make it true. There's plenty of room for the fitting of oversized prop mods to be an interesting and balanced fitting choice, as long as the benefits and drawbacks are in their proper place.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12618
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 16:02:06 -
[7] - Quote
prolix travail wrote:The new, new changes look interesting. Could you give us an idea of when they'll go live on the testserver?
They'll be in the next SISI update, probably in the next day or so.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12620
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 16:41:43 -
[8] - Quote
Alexis Nightwish wrote:Fozzie, have you considered further increasing the build cost to help offset the disparity of power between T3Ds and AFs by increasing the disparity of price between them?
The build cost changes in this pass are pretty significant, I don't think we'll be likely to go further all at once.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
|
|